Official Madden 2006 Impressions Thread

[Dave]

But like the Hitter's Eye, it's a feature that, while artificial in the way it looks, adds more realism to the game in my opinon.

I can hardly believe that two of my favorite sports game innovations came from EA in the same year--the Hitter's eye and the QB vision. I completely understand why people have differing opinions on them because they are truly artificial additions to the game.

The key to the QB vision, for me, is that Manning can make an accurate throw to a non-primary receiver without moving the vision, while Vick would have to scan, either by the double tap or the right stick.

My right thumb dexterity prevents me from using the right stick for the most part.

[Bill_Abner]

Yep. Whats the thing for me too. For years a lot of people have wanted QB AWR to matter for a human controlled QB. Now, to some degree, it does. I use the Browns, and when I pass with Dilfer I have the guy I want to go to pre-snap. If he's covered I am in deep trouble. Dilfer cannot change reads very well. It takes an extra second to do so and if there's any kind of rush, I'm screwed.

I would also add that you CAN throw outside of the cone. I do this all the time. It's hit/miss as to its success but it's not like every pass outside that radius is thrown like a pass from Martha Stewart.

I think it's a very good step in trying to make more of the ratings matter to a human controlled player. Hopefully they will try to do the same thing with running backs down the road so that it's easier to do a cut back with a guy like Lee Suggs than it is with a power back like Droughns. I think RB vision is just as vital as a QBs in many respects and right now HB AWR means as much as QB AWR used to mean prior to the cone.

[MizzouRah]

One thing that makes the passing cone great is the fact that the QB awareness rating now actualy matters. In years past, it did not matter if you were passing with Vick or Manning, the awareness of both QBs were completely moot since you were controlling them. The only awareness that actualy mattered was YOURS.

Perfectly said. I also understand those who don't like it as sometimes it frustrates the hell out of me.

Don't leave Badgun, you're views are welcomed, at least by me, and is the reason DSP is a site I like to visit for sports gaming news - talk - settings, etc. I could care less what anyone thinks of me either, but most everyone here is a sports game junky and I like the fact you don't have to go though a bunch of garbage to get good information.

[Dave]

I would also add that you CAN throw outside of the cone. I do this all the time. It's hit/miss as to its success but it's not like every pass outside that radius is thrown like a pass from Martha Stewart.

How has everyone's passes outside the cone gone? I've noticed that if I'm scrambling, the throw tends to go where the receiver is and not where he's going. That seems right.

[matthewk]

I'm to the poiunt where I realize no of us posting is going to suddenly change our minds on the cone. That's fine. In our own worlds we're each happy.

I am glad we're having this discussion if for nothing else than giving the lurkers valuable information. Both sides have made good points. I can some of where the pro-coners (can I trademark this ) are coming from, but for me the cone feature as a whole does not work for me. I am not here trying to convert anyone, but rather to try and explain my point of view.

Here's one example that came to mind. Those who use the cone say that it emulates a real QB making his progressions, or reads. When I use the cone, I first pick out my first read prior to the play and set the cone to that receiver. Once the play starts I check out the primiary to see if he's open. If he's not, I move on to read #2. Now, how many people actually move the cone to #2 prior to seeing if they are open? Does anyone move the cone to #2, see he's not open and then move to #3, all with the cone?

I'm willing to bet most only change the cones focus for 2 reasons: 1) To look off the defense or 2) once they are selecting the receiver to throw to. This is regardless of HOW you do it, r-stick or trigger. If this is what's happening, how is the cone really emulating the QBs reads if you are not using it for each and every progression? This is one of the areas where I see enough of a flaw in the implementation of the cone to prefer not using it. Nice idea in theory, but there are too many inconsistencies in the use of it.

[Dave]

Here's one example that came to mind. Those who use the cone say that it emulates a real QB making his progressions, or reads. When I use the cone, I first pick out my first read prior to the play and set the cone to that receiver. Once the play starts I check out the primiary to see if he's open. If he's not, I move on to read #2. Now, how many people actually move the cone to #2 prior to seeing if they are open? Does anyone move the cone to #2, see he's not open and then move to #3, all with the cone?

If I'm getting pressured, I'll blindly move the cone to a receiver that I hope is open. If that doesn't work, I'm usually sacked or scrambling.

[kicko]

what i have been doing is looking at an "other" reciever on purpose, then when my main gets open i switch the cone on him, so i guess you could say the decoy style

[Leebo33]

I like the cone in theory for a lot of the reasons mentioned, but I wouldn't call it very realistic. One of my favorite things to do with the cone is to originally put it on the WR that I *don't* want to throw to (for instance, someone that is double covered) while I am physically watching the one or two receivers I do want to throw to. I don't care how good Peyton Manning's "cone" is, that's something even he can't do!

[matthewk]

--Your QB now has to look in the direction he is throwing to make an accurate throw.

To a point, this is correct. If you are Manning, Brady, or Favre you can apparently see the left sideline and right sideline at the same time.

--In fact, the old method is where all QBs were equal. I used to be able to throw wherever I, the God-like figure above the stadium, was looking. Rex Grossman in 05 had the same vision as every other QB -- mine. That is no longer true, and as DB pointed out, makes a player like Vick in particular much more realistic.

Not exactly. In terms of awareness, yes, but you still have pass strength, accuracy, scrambling, etc.. to make them different.

--You can actually read a QBs eyes on defense, which is a welcome change.

Even if your defender has his back to the QB. It's a wash, because this make it just as unrealistic as not seeing his eyes.

I don't care who likes it or not. I don't, Madden is already up on Ebay for reasons other than the cone, which I will not even begin to get into here because I already know where that will lead.

[Danimal]

Here's one example that came to mind. Those who use the cone say that it emulates a real QB making his progressions, or reads. When I use the cone, I first pick out my first read prior to the play and set the cone to that receiver. Once the play starts I check out the primiary to see if he's open. If he's not, I move on to read #2. Now, how many people actually move the cone to #2 prior to seeing if they are open? Does anyone move the cone to #2, see he's not open and then move to #3, all with the cone?

Matt,

You make an excellent point. If my primary is covered, I usually (not always) do not move the cone to i scan for someone else. So yes, my virtual QB isn't exactly making the "reads" however I still need to swich the cone onto that receiver. To me, it is more about having his vision on where he is passing and making an effective throw in his vision area, and a less effective throw outside of it.

The fact that if you are running out of the pocket, the vision cone has a hard time staying on the receiver I thnk reallty reduces the accuracy of the QB. Last night I was forced out of the pocket. I had Wade crossding over the middle but i was running for my life. I had two choice at this point. 1) throw, even though the cone wasn't locked on. 2) Take my finger off of A, and then lock the cone on again. Turns out that choice #2 didn't allow me enough time before the Browns sacked my ass.

I'm not sure how you could ever implement a true QB, checkdown progression, because like someone said. We are in God view above the stadium. I think it is a step in the right direction and it could be enhanced.

[matthewk]

I swear, between this and your "people look for problems to be cool" comments, you're just trying to drum up controversy.

You obviously have no clue who I am.

You are bdunn13 from DSP with 130 posts. So unless you are one of my friends, family or coworkers, then no I do not know who you are. I do know how you post, and that you have a preconceived notion about people who point out flaws in games.

[HipE]

I'm really starting to enjoy this game the more I play it, after making some slider adjustments it really has turned into a pretty good simulation of football. I'm still not sold on the cone being the future of passing, but I don't mind using it. I do think it is fun to try to fool the defense by locking onto a receiver I have no intention of passing to, just to switch it right before I make the pass. I probably enjoy it most when I'm playing defense, it almost feels like you are playing against another person when you see the cone shifting from receiver to receiver during a play.

[Dave]

To a point, this is correct. If you are Manning, Brady, or Favre you can apparently see the left sideline and right sideline at the same time.

Have you used the cone with them? I don't know what level the screenshots on IGN were taken from, but on All-Pro, Manning's cone is about half of the field, not the entire width of it. I assume Brady and Favre are similar.

[Leebo33]

I probably enjoy it most when I'm playing defense, it almost feels like you are playing against another person when you see the cone shifting from receiver to receiver during a play.

Good point.

[Brando70]

I'm to the poiunt where I realize no of us posting is going to suddenly change our minds on the cone. That's fine. In our own worlds we're each happy.

I am glad we're having this discussion if for nothing else than giving the lurkers valuable information. Both sides have made good points. I can some of where the pro-coners (can I trademark this ) are coming from, but for me the cone feature as a whole does not work for me. I am not here trying to convert anyone, but rather to try and explain my point of view.

Here's one example that came to mind. Those who use the cone say that it emulates a real QB making his progressions, or reads. When I use the cone, I first pick out my first read prior to the play and set the cone to that receiver. Once the play starts I check out the primiary to see if he's open. If he's not, I move on to read #2. Now, how many people actually move the cone to #2 prior to seeing if they are open? Does anyone move the cone to #2, see he's not open and then move to #3, all with the cone?

I'm willing to bet most only change the cones focus for 2 reasons: 1) To look off the defense or 2) once they are selecting the receiver to throw to. This is regardless of HOW you do it, r-stick or trigger. If this is what's happening, how is the cone really emulating the QBs reads if you are not using it for each and every progression? This is one of the areas where I see enough of a flaw in the implementation of the cone to prefer not using it. Nice idea in theory, but there are too many inconsistencies in the use of it.

Those are good points, Matt, and I agree, there's a lot of room for improvement. EA certainly should have accommodated those who don't like it by turning it off for the CPU and enabling precision passing when it's not in use, too.

[matthewk]

To a point, this is correct. If you are Manning, Brady, or Favre you can apparently see the left sideline and right sideline at the same time.

Have you used the cone with them? I don't know what level the screenshots on IGN were taken from, but on All-Pro, Manning's cone is about half of the field, not the entire width of it. I assume Brady and Favre are similar.

I played a few games with Favre. It's not sideline to sideline at 5 yards, but at some point down the field I could swear it touched both sides. My point is that in their cases it's a bit unrealistic to me to think that Favre could be looking to one half of the field and be able to throw to the other withtout some movement of his head (or the cone in madden). I think they gave those guys a bit too much vision.

[spooky157]

I like what the cone is attempting to do but I'm having a tough time with it. I'll admit that I do suck at it but that's not the only reason. I understand QB awareness is now applicable but maybe they can try another system to put it in play. What I enjoy about MVP's Hitter's Eye is that it doesn't necessarily change the mechanics of hitting. It's all about recognition earlier in the pitch and that's how football games should handle it, IMO. Maybe Peyton Manning should see the blitzes coming before the snap or something along those lines. Or be able to discern man to man from zone prior to the snap.

I'm all for modelling realism but I just don't have the joystick skills necessary to take it all in. In TOCA 2 there was an option to play with manual tranny and clutch. Now that's the ultimate in realism but I could barely keep the car on the tarmac as is.

In football games past I had a tough enough time reading defenses and, whenever my primary read was covered, trying to figure out which button corresponded to my second or third read. And it's not like I was able to break Marino's records in the past when using Jesse Palmer as my starting QB.

It's cool that EA's innovating. I certainly applaud them for that. I certainly hope MLB 2K6 adopts some form of the Hitter's Eye much like they did with the pitch meter. But I have to put myself firmly in the camp of the anti-coners for now.

[sportdan30]

Has anyone read whether or not Madden for the 360 is going to be dumbed down? Will "cone vision" passing be implemented? I've opted not to purchase the current generation Madden as I'm just not excited about football.....yet. I'd rather wait a few extra months and get the next gen Madden.

[Danimal]

Has anyone read whether or not Madden for the 360 is going to be dumbed down? Will "cone vision" passing be implemented? I've opted not to purchase the current generation Madden as I'm just not excited about football.....yet. I'd rather wait a few extra months and get the next gen Madden.

I think Abner just posted a blog on it the other day.

The word is, no one really knows. I have a lot of problems getting hyped for a system, nevermind a game that is suppose to release in November, but final kits haven't even been sent odevelopers yet.

[dbdynsty25]

Edited:

No Problem J.

[Jared]

I took out all the crap from the other thread and put it in the "Everyone can fight here" thread. It seems like some of you really want to fight...so there's a thread where you can do it. In the meantime, let's keep this thread on Madden.

DB,
Please move your post to the new fighting thread.

Thank you.

[HipE]

I'm really looking forward to the XBox 360 version now, even if it is the exact same gameplay but with better graphics and presentation. The graphics and presentation are really the main things I don't like about Madden 06 on the Xbox, so improving that aspect should be enough to make it an incredible game.

[MizzouRah]

I'm really looking forward to the XBox 360 version now, even if it is the exact same gameplay but with better graphics and presentation. The graphics and presentation are really the main things I don't like about Madden 06 on the Xbox, so improving that aspect should be enough to make it an incredible game.

Besides an occasional slowdown (I hate the TOUCHDOWN animation at the top of the screen), I think the presentation is much better this year. Not up to par with NFL 2k5, but better.

[kicko]

The graphics and presentation are really the main things I don't like about Madden 06 on the Xbox.

funny because i had said about 3 weeks ago, and was almost battled for saying something like that because the game was not even out yet, but just knowing EA i knew they would not deliver any better presentation, even if it was listed as a "new" feature, which i don't recall reading off the back cover, just the web site, i used to the fact that sport games don't always look different from year to year.
besides looking like 05 i still love the game

[Slumberland]

I like the fair play stuff online a lot, and the vision cone really seems to help against cheesers as well. I played a guy last night who would just roll out and drop back 15 yards with McNabb every time, I would call a QB spy and he couldn't do diddly. Unfortunately, there's nothing to really force people to finish their games. I had both my opponents quit on me last night. Wimps.